Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

Carl Sagan explains why a child’s simple question may be deeper than most adults realize. “Mommy, why is the grass green?” And very often the child gets an answer like: “Oh, who knows?” But that is not a silly question. It is an extremely profound question. Because hidden inside... it are the fundamentals of biology, light, chemistry, and physics. How much better it would be to say: “That’s a good question.” “Maybe we can look it up.” “Maybe when you grow up, you can find the answer.” The tragedy is that many children learn the wrong lesson. They learn that asking deep questions is somehow bad. And when that happens, we lose something precious. We lose intellectual resources. We lose curiosity. We lose future thinkers. Because the complex and subtle problems we face can only be solved by people capable of complex and subtle thoughts. A child’s question is not an interruption. Sometimes, it is the beginning of science.show more

Prof. Carl Sagan

72,558 subscribers

25,353 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Искусство Образование Наука и технологии

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Great balance of showing compassion while sharing truth as Wes Huff responds to the question of why a good God would allow evil: "Well, that is arguably the hardest and most pressing apologetic question there is, because ultimately, the very tidy philosophical and theological answer isn't the right answer sometimes. You know, sometimes the right answer to the wrong question is the wrong answer, because I've encountered situations where someone has brought up a variation of the problem of evil to me, and I've just felt uneasy about maybe the tenor that they're coming at with the question...and asking them, 'You know, that's a great question. Why are you asking that question in particular?' and finding out once again (like the previous question related to it), they're personally hurting. And so, in that sense, I could give a tidy answer about if you're positing that something is good, you're positing that there's an objective good and evil, and if there's an objective good and evil, then you're positing an objective law, and objective law needs an objective lawgiver. So where do we find the groundwork for an objective lawgiver to begin with? Otherwise, you may not like certain things, but to say they ought not to happen is actually an ethical leap to an objective reality that you may or may not have groundwork for. But if that person is struggling because a family member of theirs has cancer, then that particular, maybe tidy, tied-up-in-a-nice-bow answer is not going to speak to them whatsoever. And so that's why that's the hardest question because there are actually very good answers to it, but often it doesn't speak to the person in front of you, because questions have questioners that sit behind them. And one of the pitfalls of my chosen field of ministry apologetics is that sometimes we give answers where we talk at people rather than with people. And there's a danger to that because the Christian faith isn't just an intellectual assent, right? It's a personal relationship. And that should also be played out in the answers that we give..."

Great balance of showing compassion while sharing truth as Wes Huff responds to the question of why a good God would allow evil: "Well, that is arguably the hardest and most pressing apologetic question there is, because ultimately, the very tidy philosophical and theological answer isn't the right answer sometimes. You know, sometimes the right answer to the wrong question is the wrong answer, because I've encountered situations where someone has brought up a variation of the problem of evil to me, and I've just felt uneasy about maybe the tenor that they're coming at with the question...and asking them, 'You know, that's a great question. Why are you asking that question in particular?' and finding out once again (like the previous question related to it), they're personally hurting. And so, in that sense, I could give a tidy answer about if you're positing that something is good, you're positing that there's an objective good and evil, and if there's an objective good and evil, then you're positing an objective law, and objective law needs an objective lawgiver. So where do we find the groundwork for an objective lawgiver to begin with? Otherwise, you may not like certain things, but to say they ought not to happen is actually an ethical leap to an objective reality that you may or may not have groundwork for. But if that person is struggling because a family member of theirs has cancer, then that particular, maybe tidy, tied-up-in-a-nice-bow answer is not going to speak to them whatsoever. And so that's why that's the hardest question because there are actually very good answers to it, but often it doesn't speak to the person in front of you, because questions have questioners that sit behind them. And one of the pitfalls of my chosen field of ministry apologetics is that sometimes we give answers where we talk at people rather than with people. And there's a danger to that because the Christian faith isn't just an intellectual assent, right? It's a personal relationship. And that should also be played out in the answers that we give..."

Melissa the Hopeful🏠Homemaker

116,060 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

The question is not whether Alberta can prosper. Of course we can. The question is why we keep accepting a system where Alberta’s future depends on Ottawa’s permission. That is why independence is not extreme. It is necessary.

The question is not whether Alberta can prosper. Of course we can. The question is why we keep accepting a system where Alberta’s future depends on Ottawa’s permission. That is why independence is not extreme. It is necessary.

Rise Of Alberta

13,401 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

There Should Be People Going to Prison Michael Laws, 8 Dec 2022: "We now know that whether you're vaxxed or not, it doesn't stop transmission, and the question you ask, is when did they know that? And if the answer to that question is we knew it before we put in the mandates, there should be people going to prison. Because that would then mean that you purposefully lied to all of us."

There Should Be People Going to Prison Michael Laws, 8 Dec 2022: "We now know that whether you're vaxxed or not, it doesn't stop transmission, and the question you ask, is when did they know that? And if the answer to that question is we knew it before we put in the mandates, there should be people going to prison. Because that would then mean that you purposefully lied to all of us."

Coronavirus Plushie

43,863 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

"What is P vs NP and how does it relate to human knowledge?" Avi Wigderson (Turing Award & Abel Prize winner): "In a very basic way, all the problems we want to solve are really NP problems. A subset of it is the problems we can solve. So the question of P versus NP is whether we can solve all the problems we want to solve, whether we can know everything we want to know. This is basically about the limits of our knowledge. You can think there is no limit to what we may want to know but I claim that essentially in any human endeavor, what people are searching for have the property that when a solution is found, it is easily recognized. NP are all problems that we can honestly say we really want to solve and P are those that we can solve. Whether they are equal is just the very fact that a solution can be easily recognized would imply that it can be efficiently found. That means that we can know everything we ever want to know, it's a fundamental question about human knowledge."

"What is P vs NP and how does it relate to human knowledge?" Avi Wigderson (Turing Award & Abel Prize winner): "In a very basic way, all the problems we want to solve are really NP problems. A subset of it is the problems we can solve. So the question of P versus NP is whether we can solve all the problems we want to solve, whether we can know everything we want to know. This is basically about the limits of our knowledge. You can think there is no limit to what we may want to know but I claim that essentially in any human endeavor, what people are searching for have the property that when a solution is found, it is easily recognized. NP are all problems that we can honestly say we really want to solve and P are those that we can solve. Whether they are equal is just the very fact that a solution can be easily recognized would imply that it can be efficiently found. That means that we can know everything we ever want to know, it's a fundamental question about human knowledge."

Ryan Peterman

20,069 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Sen. Bennet: “Can you commit that American farmers will not lose market access in Canada or Mexico?…How are you approaching the risk of retaliatory tariffs?” Greer: “When President Trump left office his first term, we had an ag trade surplus. By the time Biden left, we had an ag trade deficit.” Sen. Bennet: “That is not an answer to my question nor is it an answer to the crisis that our farmers and ranchers are facing...That is irrelevant.”

Sen. Bennet: “Can you commit that American farmers will not lose market access in Canada or Mexico?…How are you approaching the risk of retaliatory tariffs?” Greer: “When President Trump left office his first term, we had an ag trade surplus. By the time Biden left, we had an ag trade deficit.” Sen. Bennet: “That is not an answer to my question nor is it an answer to the crisis that our farmers and ranchers are facing...That is irrelevant.”

The Bulwark

113,068 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

BREAKING: Democrats just announced the NOPE Act -- No Political Enemies Act -- calling out President Trump. Listen to Congressman Jason Crow powerfully speak out in support of the act: "What we see out of Donald Trump and his lieutenants like Stephen Miller and Laura Loomer is an unprecedented assault on our very rights — fear and intimidation — an effort by them to say who can speak up and who can not. An effort by them and only them to say who’s a terrorist and who’s not. Who has the right to speak and who doesn’t. Power is always cyclical in America and the reason why we protect it for everybody is that the minority in those not in power — now it’s us but sometime in the future it will be someone else — have that right to question us, to push back. And if we lose it, we all lose it!"

BREAKING: Democrats just announced the NOPE Act -- No Political Enemies Act -- calling out President Trump. Listen to Congressman Jason Crow powerfully speak out in support of the act: "What we see out of Donald Trump and his lieutenants like Stephen Miller and Laura Loomer is an unprecedented assault on our very rights — fear and intimidation — an effort by them to say who can speak up and who can not. An effort by them and only them to say who’s a terrorist and who’s not. Who has the right to speak and who doesn’t. Power is always cyclical in America and the reason why we protect it for everybody is that the minority in those not in power — now it’s us but sometime in the future it will be someone else — have that right to question us, to push back. And if we lose it, we all lose it!"

Ed Krassenstein

701,682 просмотров • 11 месяцев назад

Phillip to Jennings: When you answer my question with a question, you are dodging. Answer the question. It is very telling that you are not able to entertain an answer.

Phillip to Jennings: When you answer my question with a question, you are dodging. Answer the question. It is very telling that you are not able to entertain an answer.

Acyn

162,856 просмотров • 1 год назад

“Isn’t it crazy that we can sit and watch the news and when the Karoline Leavitt is asked a question, something weird happens,.. she answers the f*cking question! Not only do she answer the question.. she make it make sense!” America loves our new Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt 🇺🇸🔥

“Isn’t it crazy that we can sit and watch the news and when the Karoline Leavitt is asked a question, something weird happens,.. she answers the f*cking question! Not only do she answer the question.. she make it make sense!” America loves our new Press Secretary, Karoline Leavitt 🇺🇸🔥

TONY™

531,929 просмотров • 1 год назад

The question we should be asking is not which programs we cut — it should be why aren't we living in a society in which all of our people have a decent standard of living? Is that a Utopian vision? It really is not.

The question we should be asking is not which programs we cut — it should be why aren't we living in a society in which all of our people have a decent standard of living? Is that a Utopian vision? It really is not.

Bernie Sanders

348,836 просмотров • 3 лет назад

Steve Witkoff on Iran: We have a 15-point deal on the table that the Iranians have had for a bit of time. We expect an answer from them and it would solve it all. It would solve the enrichment question, which is we can't have enrichment there today. It would solve the material question. They have close to 10,000 kilograms of enriched material stockpiled, which they have to give up. It would solve the stockpiling question and the oversight question.

Steve Witkoff on Iran: We have a 15-point deal on the table that the Iranians have had for a bit of time. We expect an answer from them and it would solve it all. It would solve the enrichment question, which is we can't have enrichment there today. It would solve the material question. They have close to 10,000 kilograms of enriched material stockpiled, which they have to give up. It would solve the stockpiling question and the oversight question.

Clash Report

35,506 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

RDA closing down? It is with a heavy heart I inform you that RDA is on the brink of bankruptcy. We explain it and show profit/loss statements from the last ten months so you can see why I'm making this video - There is a question mark at the end of this title because RDA can be saved, but it will be up to the people, not us.

RDA closing down? It is with a heavy heart I inform you that RDA is on the brink of bankruptcy. We explain it and show profit/loss statements from the last ten months so you can see why I'm making this video - There is a question mark at the end of this title because RDA can be saved, but it will be up to the people, not us.

Monica Smit / Reignite Democracy

14,984 просмотров • 3 лет назад

There is so much at stake in this election, and, ultimately, the question before us is: What kind of country do we want to live in? The beauty of a democracy, as long as we can hold on to it, is that each of us has the power to answer that question.

There is so much at stake in this election, and, ultimately, the question before us is: What kind of country do we want to live in? The beauty of a democracy, as long as we can hold on to it, is that each of us has the power to answer that question.

Kamala Harris

32,989,983 просмотров • 1 год назад

.Elon Musk (worth $250B) answers why he’s still working: I think it's a good question you asked, because it goes to, like, at a foundational level, what is my philosophy, and why does it lead to this conclusion? So the reason is that when I was a teenager, I had, like, an existential crisis to try to figure out what's the meaning of life. There doesn't seem to be any meaning. For me, at least the religious texts, and I read all of them that I could get my hands on did not seem convincing. Then I started reading the philosophers. Be careful of reading German philosophers as a teenager. It's definitely not going to help with your depression. So reading Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, as an adult, it's much more manageable. But as a kid, you're like, “Whoa.” So then I was like, “Man, I'm just struggling to find meaning in life here.” And then I read Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. And basically what Douglas Adams was saying is that we don't really know what the right questions are to ask. The question is not, “What's the meaning of life?” In The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Earth it turns out is a big computer, and its goal is to answer the question, “What's the meaning of life?” And Earth comes up with the answer “42”. This is where the 42 number comes from. And 420 is just ten times 42. In that book, which is really sort of a book about, it's an existential philosophy book disguised as humor. They come to the conclusion that, no, the real problem is trying to formulate the question. And to really have the right question, you need a much bigger computer than Earth. And so maybe one way, I think, of characterizing this would be to say, “The universe is the answer. What is the question? Or what are the questions?” The more we can expand the scope and scale of consciousness, the better we can understand what questions to ask about the answer that is the universe. The more we can expand consciousness, become a multi-planet species, ultimately a multistellar species… we have a chance of figuring out what the hell is going on. And so this is why I think we should have more humans and both biological and digital consciousness. And why we should become a multi-planet species and a multistellar species is so that we can understand the nature of the universe. And then in order for that to occur, then we have to make sure that things are good on Earth. We don't want Earth to disappear, so sustainable energy is important.

.Elon Musk (worth $250B) answers why he’s still working: I think it's a good question you asked, because it goes to, like, at a foundational level, what is my philosophy, and why does it lead to this conclusion? So the reason is that when I was a teenager, I had, like, an existential crisis to try to figure out what's the meaning of life. There doesn't seem to be any meaning. For me, at least the religious texts, and I read all of them that I could get my hands on did not seem convincing. Then I started reading the philosophers. Be careful of reading German philosophers as a teenager. It's definitely not going to help with your depression. So reading Schopenhauer, Nietzsche, as an adult, it's much more manageable. But as a kid, you're like, “Whoa.” So then I was like, “Man, I'm just struggling to find meaning in life here.” And then I read Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. And basically what Douglas Adams was saying is that we don't really know what the right questions are to ask. The question is not, “What's the meaning of life?” In The Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy, Earth it turns out is a big computer, and its goal is to answer the question, “What's the meaning of life?” And Earth comes up with the answer “42”. This is where the 42 number comes from. And 420 is just ten times 42. In that book, which is really sort of a book about, it's an existential philosophy book disguised as humor. They come to the conclusion that, no, the real problem is trying to formulate the question. And to really have the right question, you need a much bigger computer than Earth. And so maybe one way, I think, of characterizing this would be to say, “The universe is the answer. What is the question? Or what are the questions?” The more we can expand the scope and scale of consciousness, the better we can understand what questions to ask about the answer that is the universe. The more we can expand consciousness, become a multi-planet species, ultimately a multistellar species… we have a chance of figuring out what the hell is going on. And so this is why I think we should have more humans and both biological and digital consciousness. And why we should become a multi-planet species and a multistellar species is so that we can understand the nature of the universe. And then in order for that to occur, then we have to make sure that things are good on Earth. We don't want Earth to disappear, so sustainable energy is important.

Arjun Khemani

15,599,667 просмотров • 1 год назад

ELON'S POV ON THE MEANING OF LIFE: "IT'S ABOUT THE QUESTION, NOT THE ANSWER" Elon is literally saying the entire purpose of human existence, and everything he's building, from Neuralink and Starship to Grok and Optimus, is aimed at one goal. What's the goal, you ask? To turn humanity into a massive superintelligence that can finally figure out the right questions to ask reality itself. "Humans are 30~40 trillion cells, trillions of synapses… but the why of it is just so we can increase our understanding of the universe. I came to the conclusion, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy style, that the answer is 42, but the real problem is we don't even know what the question is. The hard part is the question, not the answer. And for that you need a much bigger computer than Earth. So by expanding the scope and scale of consciousness, we can better understand what questions to ask about the answer that is the universe." He's literally saying the entire purpose of human existence, and everything he's building (Neuralink, Starship, Grok, Optimus), is to turn humanity into a massive superintelligence that can finally figure out the right questions to ask reality itself. Not to get the answer. To learn how to ask the question that makes the answer meaningful. This is why he doesn't give a damn about money, politics, or fame anymore. He's playing the longest game in history: Turning consciousness into a galaxy-scale instrument so we can finally understand why anything exists at all. Source: Nikhil Kamath, Elon Musk

ELON'S POV ON THE MEANING OF LIFE: "IT'S ABOUT THE QUESTION, NOT THE ANSWER" Elon is literally saying the entire purpose of human existence, and everything he's building, from Neuralink and Starship to Grok and Optimus, is aimed at one goal. What's the goal, you ask? To turn humanity into a massive superintelligence that can finally figure out the right questions to ask reality itself. "Humans are 30~40 trillion cells, trillions of synapses… but the why of it is just so we can increase our understanding of the universe. I came to the conclusion, Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy style, that the answer is 42, but the real problem is we don't even know what the question is. The hard part is the question, not the answer. And for that you need a much bigger computer than Earth. So by expanding the scope and scale of consciousness, we can better understand what questions to ask about the answer that is the universe." He's literally saying the entire purpose of human existence, and everything he's building (Neuralink, Starship, Grok, Optimus), is to turn humanity into a massive superintelligence that can finally figure out the right questions to ask reality itself. Not to get the answer. To learn how to ask the question that makes the answer meaningful. This is why he doesn't give a damn about money, politics, or fame anymore. He's playing the longest game in history: Turning consciousness into a galaxy-scale instrument so we can finally understand why anything exists at all. Source: Nikhil Kamath, Elon Musk

Mario Nawfal

825,676 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

CS Davis Chirchir: We are aware that there was a power blackout yesterday, and the question we are now asking is, why so frequently? It is a challenge we are ashamed of as a country, and we must address it

CS Davis Chirchir: We are aware that there was a power blackout yesterday, and the question we are now asking is, why so frequently? It is a challenge we are ashamed of as a country, and we must address it

Citizen TV Kenya

286,891 просмотров • 2 лет назад

True when I said it, true today. “Canada is, and always has been, our country. And we want Canada to be a True North that is as strong and as free as it can be in every way that matters: the best country in the world. That’s why we’re here, that’s why we strive, that’s why we serve. Canada must reflect the true character of the Canadian people: honourable in our dealings, faithful to our commitments, loyal to our friends. By turns, a courageous warrior and a compassionate neighbour. It is our purpose that Canada must be great, it must be great for all Canadians, it must be a country of hope and an example to the world. And only when it is these things, when Canada is all that it can be, only then can we say that our work is done.”

True when I said it, true today. “Canada is, and always has been, our country. And we want Canada to be a True North that is as strong and as free as it can be in every way that matters: the best country in the world. That’s why we’re here, that’s why we strive, that’s why we serve. Canada must reflect the true character of the Canadian people: honourable in our dealings, faithful to our commitments, loyal to our friends. By turns, a courageous warrior and a compassionate neighbour. It is our purpose that Canada must be great, it must be great for all Canadians, it must be a country of hope and an example to the world. And only when it is these things, when Canada is all that it can be, only then can we say that our work is done.”

Stephen Harper

808,782 просмотров • 1 год назад

🚨 JD VANCE JUST ABSOLUTELY NAILED IT AT MARCH FOR LIFE: "Let me just say, my friends, that we have to be clear. We can NOT be neutral. Our country cannot be indifferent about whether its next generations live or die!" "Because think about it. What ultimately gives meaning and life to the United States of America, this is not a new question. Every civilization has been forced to answer it." "You march today, we march today, because you have an answer to this question about what kind of civilization we are, and about what kind of civilization we are going to become in the future."

🚨 JD VANCE JUST ABSOLUTELY NAILED IT AT MARCH FOR LIFE: "Let me just say, my friends, that we have to be clear. We can NOT be neutral. Our country cannot be indifferent about whether its next generations live or die!" "Because think about it. What ultimately gives meaning and life to the United States of America, this is not a new question. Every civilization has been forced to answer it." "You march today, we march today, because you have an answer to this question about what kind of civilization we are, and about what kind of civilization we are going to become in the future."

Eric Daugherty

20,126 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

"Every team wants to win a championship, but not every team wants to do the things required for a championship. And here's the thing: it's easy to be an average team. It doesn't require a lot. It's less adversity to be average in the world. The consequences of being average aren't easy. We end up wearing them. There's strain and struggle that comes with that too. The standard is just lower to be an average team. To be a championship team, to be champion, to be a championship team member here . . . I'm not gonna lie to you . . . I'm going to tell you the truth. It is harder. It is. The question is: Is it worth it? Some people say, "Oh it's not harder work." Yes it is. It's harder work. You can pursue comfort or you can pursue excellence. If we pursue comfort, we gotta give up some excellence. But if we pursue excellence, then we're just going to face more adversity. Everyone who's ever accomplished something excellence has had to overcome it. We are here today for a reason. Two reasons actually. Reason #1 is let's make sure that we identify and realize the opportunities that are in front of us. Reason #2 is let's make sure that we are preparing for the adversity that those opportunities require. And just understand: every single time you lever up your opportunities and you identify, "Oh there's something more I can do, more I can achieve. I can get better. I can earn more. I can do this." It's going to be matched with the adversity that comes with it. I want to make sure we are prepared for both of those, so that we're not chasing big opportunities and then getting mad when things start getting harder along the way. Is that fair? Does that make sense?"

"Every team wants to win a championship, but not every team wants to do the things required for a championship. And here's the thing: it's easy to be an average team. It doesn't require a lot. It's less adversity to be average in the world. The consequences of being average aren't easy. We end up wearing them. There's strain and struggle that comes with that too. The standard is just lower to be an average team. To be a championship team, to be champion, to be a championship team member here . . . I'm not gonna lie to you . . . I'm going to tell you the truth. It is harder. It is. The question is: Is it worth it? Some people say, "Oh it's not harder work." Yes it is. It's harder work. You can pursue comfort or you can pursue excellence. If we pursue comfort, we gotta give up some excellence. But if we pursue excellence, then we're just going to face more adversity. Everyone who's ever accomplished something excellence has had to overcome it. We are here today for a reason. Two reasons actually. Reason #1 is let's make sure that we identify and realize the opportunities that are in front of us. Reason #2 is let's make sure that we are preparing for the adversity that those opportunities require. And just understand: every single time you lever up your opportunities and you identify, "Oh there's something more I can do, more I can achieve. I can get better. I can earn more. I can do this." It's going to be matched with the adversity that comes with it. I want to make sure we are prepared for both of those, so that we're not chasing big opportunities and then getting mad when things start getting harder along the way. Is that fair? Does that make sense?"

Brian Kight

125,742 просмотров • 2 лет назад